lml,
"Digging a little bit deeper, my hypothesis is that the economics of co-loco space at the RT are significantly different ..."
How so? Dollarwise for the rental? Or, because of support issues?
"... than the same at the CO, & as a result the CLEC should think twice before making such an investment. It should pick & choose its RTs wisely as the POTENTIAL market, & thereby potential ROI, is going to be that much more limited than a similar investment at the CO. I would imagine that the potential market of customers via an investment at the CO is going to be larger than a similar investment at the RT by factor of 10 or more. This has certainly got to enter into the investment decision."
Again, I don't know what the backhaul charges are in a situation like that. In the case of the CO, the CLEC is placing their wares right at the point of copper, and they are uplinking to the 'net, or to the switch, via central office connections. In the case of the RT, there is a fee to pay for getting back to the CO on top of all else. Anyone have a handle on those fiber-related feeder costs?
Here, we get back to unbundling of lambdas versus renting T-type carrier facilities that are endemic in the NGDLC design of the ILEC. Which would be less costly, the T-3s in the NGDLC or a lambda of their own? iDunno. Perhaps you know someone you could ask? <s>
Unbundling of lambdas, btw, were included in the 1998 FCC edicts on ILEC concessions i.c.w network element unbundling. But I haven't heard of anyone doing it yet in this context, i.e., out at a Remote Terminal on a NGDLC. Then again, there are a lot of things I haven't heard of yet that are out there. Anyone?
FAC |
